82 FR 52643 - National Organic Program (NOP); Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 218 (November 14, 2017)
Agricultural Marketing Service
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 218 (November 14, 2017)
| Page Range | 52643-52644 | |
| FR Document | 2017-24675 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 52643-52644] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-24675] ======================================================================== Rules and Regulations Federal Register ________________________________________________________________________ This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. ======================================================================== Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations [[Page 52643]] DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 205 [Doc. No. AMS-NOP-15-0012; NOP-15-06] RIN 0581-AD74 National Organic Program (NOP); Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective date. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The United States Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is delaying the effective date of the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2017 (OLPP final rule), until May 14, 2018. DATES: As of November 9, 2017, the effective date of the final rule published on January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7042), delayed on February 9, 2017 (82 FR 9967), further delayed on May 10, 2017 (82 FR 21677), is further delayed until May 14, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Lewis, Ph.D., Director, Standards Division. Telephone: (202) 720-3252; Fax: (202) 260-9151. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OLPP final rule amends the organic livestock and poultry production requirements of the USDA organic regulations by adding new provisions for livestock handling and transport for slaughter and avian living conditions; and expands and clarifies existing requirements covering livestock care and production practices and mammalian living conditions. The rule finalized a proposed rule that AMS published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2016 (81 FR 21955). The OLPP final rule was scheduled to become effective on March 20, 2017. Consistent with the memorandum of January 20, 2017, to the heads of executive departments and agencies from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled, ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,'' on February 9, 2017, AMS delayed the effective date of the OLPP final rule until May 19, 2017. Because significant policy and legal issues addressed within the final rule warranted further review by USDA, AMS delayed the effective date by an additional 180 days from May 19, 2017 to November 14, 2017. In addition, AMS published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that solicited public comments on the direction that USDA should take with respect to the rule. The NPRM presented four options for agency action: ``Option 1: Implement,'' allowing the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule to take effect on November 14, 2017; ``Option 2: Suspend,'' suspending the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule indefinitely; ``Option 3: Delay,'' delaying the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule's effective date beyond November 14, 2017; and ``Option 4: Withdraw,'' withdrawing the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule. The 30-day public comment period closed on June 9, 2017. AMS received over 47,000 comments on the four options for agency action. Over 40,000 of commenters, including over 34,600 submitted as form letters, supported ``Option 1: Implement''; twenty-eight other commenters supported ``Option 4: Withdraw''; a few chose ``Option 2: Suspend''; and only one chose ``Option 3: Delay.'' The remaining commenters did not indicate a clear preference. Most commenters supporting ``Option 1: Implement'' expressed concern animals would be harmed if USDA did otherwise. Some said consumers expect animal welfare to be a part of organic certification and consumers are concerned about humane transport and slaughter procedures. Noting the inclusive nature of the rule development process, these commenters advocated for clear, consistent standards so that organic farmers would be on a ``level playing field.'' Others said they believed ``Option 1: Implement'' would strengthen USDA's organic seal broadly and benefit organic farmers. Commenters supporting ``Option 2: Suspend'' included veterinarians and farmers, and commenters supporting ``Option 4: Withdraw'' included organic producers and trade associations. These commenters gave similar reasons for their positions, including the economic costs and regulatory compliance burdens; increased consumer prices and reduced availability of organic eggs; biosecurity and food safety risks; and potentially higher avian mortality rates. Some commenters stated that the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule is unnecessary because current regulations are sufficient and the final rule is outside the scope of the NOP's authority and role. Others noted the significant investment costs in land and facilities that would be required to implement the poultry space and outdoor access requirements, making business unsustainable for many organic farmers. This final rule adopts Option 3: Delay, so that important questions regarding USDA's statutory authority to promulgate the OLPP rule and the likely costs and benefits of that rule, can be more fully assessed through the notice and comment process prior to AMS making a final decision on whether the OLPP final rule should take effect. The Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule consisted, in large part, of rules clarifying how producers and handlers participating in the National Organic Program must treat livestock and poultry to ensure their wellbeing. (82 FR 7042.) Although animal welfare is an important USDA priority, AMS believes that OFPA's reference to additional regulatory standards ``for the care'' of organically produced livestock is limited to health care practices similar to those specified by Congress in the statute, rather than as reflecting a stand-alone concern for animal welfare. AMS intends to seek public comment on this interpretation. AMS also is concerned that the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule is not consistent with USDA regulatory policy principles, including those expressed in Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, because the requirements in that rule may not represent the most innovative and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends; may impose costs that are not justified by the potential benefits; and may not reasonably be tethered to OFPA's statutory text, nature, and purpose. AMS intends to seek public comment on these questions. Of note, during the course of [[Page 52644]] reviewing the rulemaking record for the OLPP final rule, AMS discovered a significant, material error in the mathematical calculation of the benefits estimates. With the material error, the regulatory impact analysis presented costs and benefits in a table that could be reasonably interpreted to conclude that benefits were likely to exceed the costs. (82 FR 7083-82 FR 7084.) However, AMS believes that the regulatory impact analysis' calculation of benefits was flawed because the incorrect calculation was applied for the 3 percent and 7 percent discount rates. Re-analysis using the correct mathematical calculations suggests that this error was material. It is not appropriate for AMS to allow a final rule to become effective based on a record containing such a material error. AMS intends to seek public comment on the revised calculation of benefits. Due to these significant concerns regarding statutory authority for, and costs and benefits of, the OLPP rule, including the question whether the OLPP final rule was based on a mathematically flawed assessment of benefits, AMS is selecting Option 3: Delay. AMS is issuing this final rule to further delay the effective date for until May 14, 2018 to allow for AMS to issue another notice of proposed rulemaking to receive comments on USDA statutory authority under the OFPA to regulate animal welfare; the likely costs and benefits of the OLPP rule viewed in terms of the statutory objectives of the OPFA, as interpreted above; whether the OLPP rule's requirements represent the most innovate and least burdensome way to achieve regulatory ends; and the revised calculations and analysis of the benefits of the OLPP rule. This delay will provide additional time for AMS to solicit comment on these important issues and review all the comments prior to making a final decision on the direction of the OLPP final rule. To preserve the status quo rather than allow an expansive set of new requirements to become effective only to be delayed, suspended, or withdrawn a short time later and to allow AMS to receive and consider comments on the issues discussed above, this final rule action is effective upon publication because AMS believes that the 30-day delay is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. When agencies establish good cause for an immediate effective date, Congress intended that, combined with unavoidable time limitations, ``the primary consideration was to be the `convenience or necessity of the people affected.' '' United States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (citing S.Rep.No.752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess. 15 (1946); H.R.Rep.No.1980, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. 25 (1946)). Ordinarily, the thirty-day waiting period gives stakeholders and the public a reasonable time to adjust behavior. Omnipoint Corp. v. F.C.C., 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996). In this case, however, a thirty-day waiting period would require stakeholders to begin changing their behavior to comply with the OLPP final rule, when that rule may be delayed, suspended, or withdrawn after the agency has completed review of comments in response to an notice of proposed rulemaking that will present the issues discussed above. It is also contrary to the public interest to allow a final rule that is based on a flawed record to become effective. Thus, and for the reasons stated above, waiting for thirty days to delay the effective date of the OLPP final rule is not warranted by ``convenience'' and would be unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. Dated: November 8, 2017. Sonia N. Jimenez, Acting Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. 2017-24675 Filed 11-9-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
![52643
Rules and Regulations Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 218
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER 2017, to the heads of executive ‘‘Option 4: Withdraw’’ included organic
contains regulatory documents having general departments and agencies from the producers and trade associations. These
applicability and legal effect, most of which Assistant to the President and Chief of commenters gave similar reasons for
are keyed to and codified in the Code of Staff, entitled, ‘‘Regulatory Freeze their positions, including the economic
Federal Regulations, which is published under Pending Review,’’ on February 9, 2017, costs and regulatory compliance
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
AMS delayed the effective date of the burdens; increased consumer prices and
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by OLPP final rule until May 19, 2017. reduced availability of organic eggs;
the Superintendent of Documents. Because significant policy and legal biosecurity and food safety risks; and
issues addressed within the final rule potentially higher avian mortality rates.
warranted further review by USDA, Some commenters stated that the
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AMS delayed the effective date by an Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices
additional 180 days from May 19, 2017 final rule is unnecessary because
Agricultural Marketing Service to November 14, 2017. In addition, AMS current regulations are sufficient and
published a notice of proposed the final rule is outside the scope of the
7 CFR Part 205 rulemaking (NPRM) that solicited public NOP’s authority and role. Others noted
[Doc. No. AMS–NOP–15–0012; NOP–15–06] comments on the direction that USDA the significant investment costs in land
RIN 0581–AD74
should take with respect to the rule. The and facilities that would be required to
NPRM presented four options for agency implement the poultry space and
National Organic Program (NOP); action: ‘‘Option 1: Implement,’’ allowing outdoor access requirements, making
Organic Livestock and Poultry the Organic Livestock and Poultry business unsustainable for many organic
Practices Practices final rule to take effect on farmers. This final rule adopts Option 3:
November 14, 2017; ‘‘Option 2: Delay, so that important questions
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, Suspend,’’ suspending the Organic regarding USDA’s statutory authority to
USDA. Livestock and Poultry Practices final promulgate the OLPP rule and the likely
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective rule indefinitely; ‘‘Option 3: Delay,’’ costs and benefits of that rule, can be
date. delaying the Organic Livestock and more fully assessed through the notice
Poultry Practices final rule’s effective and comment process prior to AMS
SUMMARY: The United States Department
date beyond November 14, 2017; and making a final decision on whether the
of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing
‘‘Option 4: Withdraw,’’ withdrawing the OLPP final rule should take effect.
Service (AMS) is delaying the effective
Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices The Organic Livestock and Poultry
date of the Organic Livestock and
final rule. The 30-day public comment Practices final rule consisted, in large
Poultry Practices final rule published in
period closed on June 9, 2017. part, of rules clarifying how producers
the Federal Register on January 19,
AMS received over 47,000 comments and handlers participating in the
2017 (OLPP final rule), until May 14,
on the four options for agency action. National Organic Program must treat
2018.
Over 40,000 of commenters, including livestock and poultry to ensure their
DATES: As of November 9, 2017, the over 34,600 submitted as form letters, wellbeing. (82 FR 7042.) Although
effective date of the final rule published supported ‘‘Option 1: Implement’’; animal welfare is an important USDA
on January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7042), twenty-eight other commenters priority, AMS believes that OFPA’s
delayed on February 9, 2017 (82 FR supported ‘‘Option 4: Withdraw’’; a few reference to additional regulatory
9967), further delayed on May 10, 2017 chose ‘‘Option 2: Suspend’’; and only standards ‘‘for the care’’ of organically
(82 FR 21677), is further delayed until one chose ‘‘Option 3: Delay.’’ The produced livestock is limited to health
May 14, 2018. remaining commenters did not indicate care practices similar to those specified
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul a clear preference. by Congress in the statute, rather than
Lewis, Ph.D., Director, Standards Most commenters supporting ‘‘Option as reflecting a stand-alone concern for
Division. Telephone: (202) 720–3252; 1: Implement’’ expressed concern animal welfare. AMS intends to seek
Fax: (202) 260–9151. animals would be harmed if USDA did public comment on this interpretation.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OLPP otherwise. Some said consumers expect AMS also is concerned that the
final rule amends the organic livestock animal welfare to be a part of organic Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices
and poultry production requirements of certification and consumers are final rule is not consistent with USDA
the USDA organic regulations by adding concerned about humane transport and regulatory policy principles, including
new provisions for livestock handling slaughter procedures. Noting the those expressed in Executive Orders
and transport for slaughter and avian inclusive nature of the rule 12866 and 13563, because the
living conditions; and expands and development process, these commenters requirements in that rule may not
clarifies existing requirements covering advocated for clear, consistent standards represent the most innovative and least
livestock care and production practices so that organic farmers would be on a burdensome tools for achieving
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
and mammalian living conditions. The ‘‘level playing field.’’ Others said they regulatory ends; may impose costs that
rule finalized a proposed rule that AMS believed ‘‘Option 1: Implement’’ would are not justified by the potential
published in the Federal Register on strengthen USDA’s organic seal broadly benefits; and may not reasonably be
April 13, 2016 (81 FR 21955). The OLPP and benefit organic farmers. tethered to OFPA’s statutory text,
final rule was scheduled to become Commenters supporting ‘‘Option 2: nature, and purpose. AMS intends to
effective on March 20, 2017. Consistent Suspend’’ included veterinarians and seek public comment on these
with the memorandum of January 20, farmers, and commenters supporting questions. Of note, during the course of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:31 Nov 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM 14NOR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52861/page/1.svg)
![52644 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
reviewing the rulemaking record for the (citing S.Rep.No.752, 79th Cong., 1st prompted by a report of a cracked MLG
OLPP final rule, AMS discovered a Sess. 15 (1946); H.R.Rep.No.1980, 79th retract actuator rod end. We are issuing
significant, material error in the Cong., 2d Sess. 25 (1946)). Ordinarily, this AD to address the unsafe condition
mathematical calculation of the benefits the thirty-day waiting period gives on these products.
estimates. With the material error, the stakeholders and the public a reasonable DATES: This AD is effective December
regulatory impact analysis presented time to adjust behavior. Omnipoint 19, 2017.
costs and benefits in a table that could Corp. v. F.C.C., 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. The Director of the Federal Register
be reasonably interpreted to conclude Cir. 1996). In this case, however, a approved the incorporation by reference
that benefits were likely to exceed the thirty-day waiting period would require of a certain publication listed in this AD
costs. (82 FR 7083–82 FR 7084.) stakeholders to begin changing their as of July 20, 2016 (81 FR 43481, July
However, AMS believes that the behavior to comply with the OLPP final 5, 2016).
regulatory impact analysis’ calculation rule, when that rule may be delayed, ADDRESSES: For service information
of benefits was flawed because the suspended, or withdrawn after the identified in this final rule, contact
incorrect calculation was applied for the agency has completed review of Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical
3 percent and 7 percent discount rates. comments in response to an notice of Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard,
Re-analysis using the correct proposed rulemaking that will present Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada;
mathematical calculations suggests that the issues discussed above. It is also telephone: 416–375–4000; fax: 416–
this error was material. It is not contrary to the public interest to allow 375–4539; email: thd.qseries@
appropriate for AMS to allow a final a final rule that is based on a flawed aero.bombardier.com; Internet: http://
rule to become effective based on a record to become effective. Thus, and www.bombardier.com. You may view
record containing such a material error. for the reasons stated above, waiting for this referenced service information at
AMS intends to seek public comment thirty days to delay the effective date of the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
on the revised calculation of benefits. the OLPP final rule is not warranted by 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
Due to these significant concerns ‘‘convenience’’ and would be For information on the availability of
regarding statutory authority for, and unnecessary and contrary to the public this material at the FAA, call 425–227–
costs and benefits of, the OLPP rule, interest. 1221. It is also available on the Internet
including the question whether the
OLPP final rule was based on a Dated: November 8, 2017. at http://www.regulations.gov by
mathematically flawed assessment of Sonia N. Jimenez, searching for and locating Docket No.
benefits, AMS is selecting Option 3: Acting Associate Administrator, Agricultural FAA–2017–0712.
Delay. AMS is issuing this final rule to Marketing Service. Examining the AD Docket
further delay the effective date for until [FR Doc. 2017–24675 Filed 11–9–17; 8:45 am]
You may examine the AD docket on
May 14, 2018 to allow for AMS to issue BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
the Internet at http://
another notice of proposed rulemaking
www.regulations.gov by searching for
to receive comments on USDA statutory
and locating Docket No. FAA–2017–
authority under the OFPA to regulate DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 0712; or in person at the Docket
animal welfare; the likely costs and
Federal Aviation Administration Management Facility between 9 a.m.
benefits of the OLPP rule viewed in
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
terms of the statutory objectives of the
14 CFR Part 39 except Federal holidays. The AD docket
OPFA, as interpreted above; whether the
contains this AD, the regulatory
OLPP rule’s requirements represent the [Docket No. FAA–2017–0712; Product evaluation, any comments received, and
most innovate and least burdensome Identifier 2017–NM–014–AD; Amendment other information. The address for the
way to achieve regulatory ends; and the 39–19095; AD 2017–23–01]
revised calculations and analysis of the Docket Office (telephone: 800–647–
benefits of the OLPP rule. This delay RIN 2120–AA64 5527) is Docket Management Facility,
will provide additional time for AMS to U.S. Department of Transportation,
Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Docket Operations, M–30, West
solicit comment on these important Inc., Airplanes
issues and review all the comments Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
prior to making a final decision on the AGENCY: Federal Aviation 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
direction of the OLPP final rule. Administration (FAA), Department of Washington, DC 20590.
To preserve the status quo rather than Transportation (DOT). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz
allow an expansive set of new ACTION: Final rule. Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
requirements to become effective only to and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA,
be delayed, suspended, or withdrawn a SUMMARY: We are superseding New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
short time later and to allow AMS to Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016–13– Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
receive and consider comments on the 14, which applied to certain 11590; telephone: 516–228–7329; fax:
issues discussed above, this final rule Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC–8–400 516–794–5531.
action is effective upon publication series airplanes. AD 2016–13–14 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
because AMS believes that the 30-day required an inspection to determine if
delay is impracticable, unnecessary, and certain left and right main landing gear Discussion
contrary to the public interest. When (MLG) retract actuator rod ends were We issued a notice of proposed
agencies establish good cause for an installed, repetitive liquid penetrant rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
immediate effective date, Congress inspections (LPIs) of affected left and part 39 to supersede AD 2016–13–14,
intended that, combined with right MLG retract actuator rod ends, and Amendment 39–18579 (81 FR 43481,
unavoidable time limitations, ‘‘the corrective actions if necessary. This new July 5, 2016) (‘‘AD 2016–13–14’’). AD
primary consideration was to be the AD retains the actions specified in AD 2016–13–14 applied to certain
‘convenience or necessity of the people 2016–13–14 and also requires Bombardier, Inc., Model DHC–8–400
affected.’ ’’ United States v. Gavrilovic, replacement of the left and right MLG series airplanes. The NPRM published
551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) retract actuator rod ends. This AD was in the Federal Register on July 28, 2017
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:31 Nov 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM 14NOR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_52861/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2018-10-25 10:32:14
Document Modified: 2018-10-25 10:32:14
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule; delay of effective date. | |
| Dates | As of November 9, 2017, the effective date of the final rule published on January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7042), delayed on February 9, 2017 (82 FR 9967), further delayed on May 10, 2017 (82 FR 21677), is further delayed until May 14, 2018. | |
| Contact | Paul Lewis, Ph.D., Director, Standards Division. Telephone: (202) 720-3252; Fax: (202) 260-9151. | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 52643 | |
| RIN Number | 0581-AD74 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR